Thi

sdoc
umenti
smadeav
ai
l
abl
et
hr
ought
hedec
l
as
s
i
f
i
c
at
i
onef
f
or
t
s
andr
es
ear
c
hofJ
ohnGr
eenewal
d,J
r
.
,c
r
eat
orof
:

T
h
eB
l
a
c
kV
a
u
l
t
TheBl
ac
kVaul
ti
st
hel
ar
ges
tonl
i
neFr
eedom ofI
nf
or
mat
i
onAc
t(
FOI
A)
doc
umentc
l
ear
i
nghous
ei
nt
hewor
l
d.Ther
es
ear
c
hef
f
or
t
sher
ear
e
r
es
pons
i
bl
ef
ort
hedec
l
as
s
i
f
i
c
at
i
onofhundr
edsoft
hous
andsofpages
r
el
eas
edbyt
heU.
S.Gov
er
nment&Mi
l
i
t
ar
y
.
Di
scovert
heTr
ut
hat
:ht
t
p:
/
/
www.
t
hebl
ackvaul
t
.
com

United States Department of State

Washington, D.C. 20520

MAR 1 3 2015
Case No. F-2014-20870
Segment: WEP-0001

John Greenewald

Dear Mr. Greenewald:

In response to your request dated November 16, 2014, under the Freedom of
Information Act (Title 5 USC Section 552), we initiated a search of the
following Department of State record system: the Central Foreign Policy
Records (the principal record system of the Department of State).
The search of the records has been completed and has resulted in the retrieval of
one document responsive to your request. After reviewing this document, we
have determined that it may be released in full. All released material is
enclosed.
The Freedom of Information Act provides for the recovery of the direct costs of
searching for and duplicating records requested for non-commercial use.
However, no fee is charged for the first two hours of search time or for the first
one hundred pages of duplication. Since less than two hours of search time have
been expended and fewer than one hundred pages have been duplicated in this
case, your request has been processed without charge to you.
We have now completed the processing of your case. If you have any questions,
you may write to the Office of Information Programs and Services, SA-2,
Department of State, Washington, DC 20522-8100, or telephone us at (202)

- 2 -

261-8484. Please be sure to refer to the case number shown above in all
correspondence about this case.
Sincerely,

irector
rograms and Services

Enclosures:
As stated.

The Freedom of Information Act (5 USC 552)

FOIA Exemptions
(b)( 1)

Information specifically authorized by an executive order to be kept secret in the interest of

national defense or foreign policy. Executive Order 13526 includes the following
classification categories:
1.4(a)
1.4(b)
1.4(c)
1.4(d)
1.4(e)

Military plans, systems, or operations

Foreign government information
Intelligence activities, sources or methods, or cryptology
Foreign relations or foreign activities of the US, including confidential sources
Scientific, technological, or economic matters relating to national security,
including defense against transnational terrorism
1.4(f) U.S. Government programs for safeguarding nuclear materials or facilities
1.4(g) Vulnerabilities or capabilities of systems, installations, infrastructures, projects,
plans, or protection services relating to US national security, including defense
against transnational terrorism
l.4(h) Weapons of mass destruction
(b )(2)

Related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency

(b)(3)

Specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other than 5 USC 552), for example:
ARMSEXP
CIA PERS/ORG
EXPORT CONTROL
FSACT

INA
IRAN

Arms Export Control Act, 50a USC 24ll(c)

Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, 50 USC 403(g)
Export Administration Act of 1979, 50 USC App. Sec. 241l(c)
Foreign Service Act of 1980, 22 USC 4004
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 USC 1202(f), Sec. 222(f)
Iran Claims Settlement Act, Public Law 99-99, Sec. 505

(b)( 4)

Trade secrets and confidential commercial or financial information

(b)( 5)

Interagency or intra-agency communications forming part of the deliberative process,

attorney-client privilege, or attorney work product

(b)( 6)

Personal privacy information

(b )(7)

Law enforcement information whose disclosure would:

(A) interfere with enforcement proceedings
(B) deprive a person of a fair trial
(C) constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy
(D) disclose confidential sources
(E) disclose investigation techniques
(F) endanger life or physical safety of an individual

(b )(8)

Prepared by or for a government agency regulating or supervising financial institutions

(b )(9)

Geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells

Other Grounds for Withholding

NR

Material not responsive to a FOIA request excised with the agreement of the requester

63934 Federal RegisterNo1.69, No. 212

Rules and Regulations
Subpart F- Appeal Procedures
171 .52 Appeal of denial of access to, declassification of, amendment of, accounting of
disclosures of, or challenge to classification of records.
(a) Right of administrative appeal. Except for records that have been reviewed and withheld
within the past two years or are the subject oflitigation, any requester whose request for
access to records, declassification of records, amendment of records, accounting of disclosure
of records, or any authorized holder of classified information whose classification challenge
has been denied, has a right to appeal the denial to the Department' s Appeals Review Panel.
This appeal right includes the right to appeal the determination by the Department that no
records responsive to an access request exist in Department files . Privacy Act appeals may be
made only by the individual to whom the records pertain.
(b) Form of appeal. There is no required form for an appeal. However, it is essential that the
appeal contain a clear statement of the decision or determination by the Department being
appealed. When possible, the appeal should include argumentation and documentation to
support the appeal and to contest the bases for denial cited by the Department. The appeal
should be sent to: Chairman, Appeals Review Panel, c/o Appeals Officer, A/GI~/I~Sl.PPILC ,
U.S. Department of State, SA-2, Room 8100,Washington, DC 20522-8100.
(c) Time Limits. The appeal should be received within 60 days of the date of receipt by the
requester of the Department's denial. The time limit for response to an appeal begins to run
on the day the appeal is received. The time limit (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal
public holidays) for agency decision on an administrative appeal is 20 days under the FOIA
(which may be extended for up to an additional 10 days in unusual circumstances) and 30
days under the Privacy Act (which the Panel may extend an additional30 days for good cause
shown). The Panel shall decide mandatory declassification review appeals as promptly as
possible.
(d) Notification to appellant. The Chairman of the Appeals Review Panel shall notify the
appellant in writing of the Panel's decision on the appeal. When the decision is to uphold the
denial, the Chairman shall include in his notification the reasons therefor. The appellant shall
be advised that the decision of the Panel represents the final decision of the Department and
of the right to seek judicial review of the Panel's decision, when applicable. In mandatory
declassification review appeals, the Panel shall advise the requester of the right to appeal the
decision to the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel under 3.5(d) ofE.O.
12958.

"" UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20870 Doc No. C05734619 Date: 03/04/2015

CONFIDENTIAL
HAVANA 04707 301910Z
PAGE 01
ACTION ARA-16
INFO OCT-01 ADS-00 INR-10 SS-15 CIAE-00 DODE-00 H-01
NSCE-00 NSAE-00 SS0-00 HA-06 L-03 PM-09 PA-01
HHS-04 INRE-00 OES-09 ACDA-12 ICAE-00 SP-02 SPRS-02
/091 w
-----------------024424 301913Z /43
0 301732Z JUL 81
FM USINT HAVANA
TO,SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6570

[RELEASED IN FULL[

C 0 N FIDE NT I A L HAVANA 04707

E.O. 12065: GDS 7/30187 (SMITH, W.S.) OR-M
TAGS: PEPR CU US
SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CUBAN ACCUSATIONS CONCERNING BACTERIOLOGICAL
WARFARE
REF: STATE 198619
1. C-ENTIRE TEXT.
2. SUMMARY: IN DEMARCHE JULY 29, US INT CHIEF REJECTED CHARGES
MADE IN CASTRO'S JULY 26 SPEECH AND PROTESTED FACT THEY HAD BEEN
VOICED PUBLICLY WITHOUT SHRED OF EVIDENCE . CUBAN INTERLOCUTOR REPLIED THAT POSSIBILITY US ENGAGED IN BACTERIOLOGICAL WARFARE
EFFORTS AGAINST CUBA WAS ONLY A SUSPICION . EXILE TERRORIST
ACTIVITIES AGAINST CUBA AND US TOLERATION OF THOSE ACTIVITIES
WERE FACTS. US INT CHIEF SAID TOLERATION BY NO MEANS A FACT.
US LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES WERE TAKING APPROPRIATE MEASURES
TO ENFORCE NEUTRALITY LAWS AND OTHER STATUTES. END SUMMARY
3. USINT CHIEF CALLED ON JOAQUIN MAS, MINREX DIRECTOR NORTH
AMERICAN AFFAIRS, JULY 29. BASING HIMSELF ON SPOKESMAN'S
JULY 27 STATEMENT (REFTEL) AND EARLIER STATEMENTS REGARDING US
POSITION ON EXILE TERRORIST ACTIVITIES, HE MADE FOLLOWING
POINTS:
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
PAGE 02

HAVANA 04707 301910Z

--US REJECTED OUT OF HAND ANY INSINUATION THAT IT IN ANY

WAY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FOUR PLAGUES MENTIONED IN CASTRO'S
SPEECH,OR, FOR THAT MATTER, ANY OTHER PLAGUE OR DISEASE
SUFFERED BY CUBA. INSINUATION HAD BEEN MADE WITHOUT A SHRED
OF EVIDENCE.

REVIEW AUTHORITY: Alan

Flanigan, Senior Reviewer

--NEITHER NOW NOR IN PAST HAS US USED BACTERIOLOGICAL WARFARE

METHODS AGAINST CUBA.

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20870 Doc No. C05734619 Date: 03/04/2015

"" UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20870 Doc No. C05734619 Date: 03/04/2015

--CUBANS, MOREOVER, KNEW LICENSE FOR EXPORT OF ABATE HAD BEEN

APPROVED BY USG ON JULY 17, YET HAD CHOSEN TO IGNORE THIS
COOPERATION AND TO SUGGEST US SOMEHOW RESPONSIBLE FOR FACT
SHIPMENT HAD NOT YET ARRIVED. THIS WAS NONSENSE AND CUBANS
KNEW IT.
--GIVEN ALL THESE FACTORS, ONE COULD ONLY CONCLUDE ALLEGATIONS
CONCERNING US BACTERIOLOGICAL WARFARE EFFORTS AGAINST CUBA HAD
BEEN MADE FOR CYNICAL PURPOSES . WE THEREFORE NOT ONLY REJECTED
THEM BUT PROTESTED FACT THEY HAD BEEN MADE AT ALL.
-- US ALSO REJECTED SUGGESTION THAT ANY ENTITY OF USG WAS INVOLVED IN OR SUPPORTED TERRORIST ACTIONS AGAINST CUBA SUCH AS
THOSE ENGAGED IN BY ALPHA-66. US LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HAD
TAKEN AND WOULD CONTINUE TO TAKE ACTIONS TO ENFORCE OUR NEUTRALITY LAWS. USINT CHIEF REMINDED MAS OF THE SIX ALPHA-66 MEMBERS
ARRESTED SOME MONTHS AGO.
4. MAS SAID HE WISHED TO CLARIFY THAT PRESIDENT CASTRO HAD NOT
ACCUSED US OF INTRODUCING PLAGUES. RATHER, HE HAD SAID HE
SHARED SUSPICIONS OF CUBAN PEOPLE THAT CIA MIGHT BE RESPONSIBLE .
FURTHER, THIS HAD BEEN PRESENTED AGAINST BACKGROUND OF INCREASING TERRORIST ACTIVITIES AGAINST CUBA WHICH , IF NOT ACTCONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
PAGE 03

HAVANA 04707 301910Z

UALLY COUNTING WITH ITS SUPPORT, WERE CLEARLY TOLERATED

BY USG. SINCE BACTERIOLOGICAL WARFARE HAD ONCE BEEN CONTEMPLATED AS PART OF OPERATION MONGOOSE, WHY WAS IT ABSURD TO
SUPPOSE THAT IF USG RETURNING TO THAT KIND OF MIND-SET IT WOULD
REJECT SUCH MEASURES NOW. THERE WERE GROUNDS FOR SUSPICION .
US HAD BACTERIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAM AND HAD CAPABILITY OF
INTRODUCING DENGUE, SUGAR CANE RUST, ETC. IT WA FACT, MOREOVER, THAT CUBA HAD NEVER HAD SERIOUS PROBLEMS WITH SUGAR CANE
RUST UNTIL LAST YEAR AND HAD NEVER BEFORE SUFFERED DENGUE
TYPE-2. HOW COULD ONE EXPLAIN OUTBREAK NOW? US MIGHT NOT BE
RESPONSIBLE, BUT CUBA HAD TO BE SUSPICIOUS-- AND ITS SUSPICIONS
WERE NOT SO FAR FETCHED.
5. USINT CHIEF SAID THAT WAS STUFF AND NONSENSE AND CUBANS KNEW
IT. FACT WAS THAT CUBA HAD BEEN AFFLICTED BY SUGAR CANE
RUST BECAUSE OF FOOLISH DECISION TO SHIFT TO TYPE OF CANE WHICH
NOT RESISTANT TO RUST. RESULTS WERE PREDICTABLE. THOSE WHO
MADE DECISION COULD BLAME THEMSELVES, NOT US. AS FOR DENGUE,
PERHAPS IT HAD BEEN BROUGHT IN BY CUBAN TROOPS RETURNING FROM
AFRICA. CUBA SHOULD TAKE MORE EFFECTIVE PREVENTATIVE MEASURES.
AGAIN, IT HAD ITSELF TO BLAME. US HAD COOPERATED WITH PAHO
IN CONTROL EFFORT BY LICENSING SALE OF ABATE SAME DAY IT REQUESTED.
6. MAS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT LICENSE HAD BEEN GRANTED BUT NOTED
THAT FOR REASONS WHICH HAD NEVER BEEN EXPLAINED IN CUBA, IT STILL
HAD NOT RECEIVED SHIPMENT, THOUGH SHIP HAD BEEN WAITING TO PICK
UP THE FIRST 100 TONS.

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20870 Doc No. C05734619 Date: 03/04/2015

"' UNClASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20870 Doc No. C05734619 Date: 03/04/2015

7. USINT CHIEF SAID THERE OBVIOUSLY SOME CONFUSION SINCE WHO

REP IN HAVANA HAD TOLD HIM CUBANS WANTED TO WAIT AND PICK UP
ALL 300 TONS AT SAME TIME. IN ANY EVENT, THAT WAS SOMETHING
BETWEEN PAHO AND GOC. USG HAD DONE ITS PART BY LICENSING SHIPMENT.
8. MAS ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED THAT SHIFT TO NON-RESISTANT CANE
HAD DOUBTLESS BEEN FACTOR IN OUTBREAK OF RUST AND REITERATED
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
PAGE 04

HAVANA 04707 301910Z

THAT CUBA HAD NOT ACCUSED US. IT HAD, RATHER, VOICED SUSPICIONS.
HE FELT GOC WOULD TAKE USG'S CATEGORIC DENIAL AS "VERY POSITIVE
DEVELOPMENT."
9. EXILE TERRORIST ACTIVITIES AGAINST CUBA, HOWEVER, WERE SOMETHING ELSE AGAIN . HERE, US DENIALS WERE NOT CATEGORIC. US SAID
IT DID NOT SUPPORT EXILE TERRORISTS , BUT CLEAR FACT WAS THAT
IT TOLERATED THEIR ACTIONS. ALPHA-56 OPERATED WITH IMPUNITY,
EVEN HOLDING PRESS CONFERENCE TO ANNOUNCE ITS INTENTIONS. ALPHA-56
WAS NOW EVEN OPERATING RADIO STATION ON DAILY BASIS CALLING FOR
ACTS OF TERRORISM AND SABOTAGE IN CUBA. US LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES DO NOTHING. THEY MUST HAVE ORDERS TO DO NOTHING.

10. USINT CHIEF SAID THIS NOT THE CASE. WHEN LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES DETECTED VIOLATIONS OF LAW AND HAD EVIDENCE, THEY
ARRESTED AND PROSECUTED. FACT THAT THEY COULD NOT DETECT EVERY
VIOLATION OR DID NOT ALWAYS HAVE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE IN NO WAY
SUGGESTED THAT USG WAS TOLERANT OF THESE OR ANY OTHER ILLEGAL
ACTIVITIES.
11 . REITERATING THAT US REJECTED ALLEGATIONS AND INSINUATIONS
IN CASTRO'S JULY 26 SPEECH, US INT CHIEF TOOK LEAVE.
SMITH

CONFIDENTIAL

NWZCZ

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20870 Doc No. C05734619 Date: 03/04/2015